How 'protected' are we sharing our files with others on p2p?...see article on following website:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...04/MN122017.DTL
4 students sued over music trading software....
Printable View
How 'protected' are we sharing our files with others on p2p?...see article on following website:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...04/MN122017.DTL
4 students sued over music trading software....
well when they come they come it's your choice either share or not to share...as i live in uk i dont worry me about the riaa
First of all, they were sharing files from a college, wich, depending on the college, can be the stupidest thing to do, sice most colleges have pretty tight security for p2p appz nowadays....if U'r just a regular "home sharer" then the only "danger" U might just possibly be in, is to get a letter from your ISP, telling U to stop sharing...but even that only happens to a few people :D
Again, get yourself peerguardian to block specific internet cops and the RIAA/MPAA. As their IP changes, updates are warranted, so keep the updates.
Dude, the RIAA is a powerless joke. If they had any true legal power, this p2p thing would have been done years ago. Even the RIAA has admitted that filesharing will be an ongoing problem, with no end in sight. Also, it is not illegal to copy and share music, as long as you do not PROFIT from the work of others. Unfortunately, the music/movie industry never expected people to use the internet for purposes like this.Quote:
Originally posted by mobboss01@4 April 2003 - 21:16
Again, get yourself peerguardian to block specific internet cops and the RIAA/MPAA. As their IP changes, updates are warranted, so keep the updates.
By the way, blocking suspected IPs is a waste of time. The RIAA can use ANY pc with internet access to download files from you. Once they have downloaded a suspected copyrighted file, they can get a search warrant, in any state, to monitor your internet activity. They do this from your ISP's location, so you'll never know that you're being watched until its too late.
MOST of the blocked ip addresses in peer guardian are of companies DEDICATED to the destruction of p2p networks. And only ISPs like AOL have RIAA moles working from the inside.
It is true that RIAA/MPAA/BSA/others could get residential broadband connections and go after copyright violators BUT... they'd have to get a business liscence/business connection (which costs more money than regular connections) to do it or be in violation of the law.
Peer Guardian v1.95 beta blocks the BIGGEST threats IMO. Although blocking RIAA/MPAA themselves is just a spite thing as RIAA/MPAA seldom do things like that directly and instead contract out such work...
half the problem was that thery created there own network. It was a few students sharing about a million of songs. So the RIAA wants them gone before there network spreads and they have another KaZaa to worry about.
I dont like posting links.
here is the story from cnn
;)Quote:
LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- The recording industry is expanding its fight against illegal Internet content swapping by suing four college students for allegedly offering more than 1 million copies of popular music.
In lawsuits filed Thursday in federal courts in New York, New Jersey and Michigan, the Recording Industry of America asked that the sites be shut down and that it be paid maximum damages of $150,000 per song.
The RIAA said the file-sharing systems were being run by students at Princeton University, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and Michigan Technological University. The schools were not named as defendants.
The RIAA said the offenses were akin to those committed by Napster, which was ordered shut down after the courts found it violated musical copyrights.
"These systems are just as illegal and operate in the same manner," RIAA President Cary Sherman said in a statement.
The action reflects a recent trend in which the entertainment industry has become more aggressive in pursuing copyright infringers.
Four entertainment industry groups sent a letter to 2,300 university presidents last year, urging a tough stand on copyright infringement, and in January a federal judge in Washington, D.C., ruled that Verizon Communications Inc. must identify an Internet subscriber suspected of illegally offering more than 600 songs from well known artists. The RIAA had sought the user's identity with a subpoena approved under the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
In February, the RIAA joined with the Motion Picture Association of America in sending a six-page brochure to Fortune 1000 corporations that suggested corporate policies and offered a sample memo to employees warning against using company computers to download content from the Web.
The suits allege the students stored thousands of songs on a central server and made them available to students, staff, administrators and others with access to their schools' high-speed Internet networks. The songs could be downloaded using standard Web browsers.
The universities said they were investigating the claims. All the schools have policies prohibiting the use of their computer networks for copyright infringement.
Princeton spokeswoman Lauren Robinson-Brown said the school is unable to constantly monitor its network, but does take swift action when told of copyright infringement. The school removed the site within 24 hours of being notified, she said.
The legal action irritated Michigan Technological University President Curtis Tompkins, who said he wished the music industry had contacted the school, as he said it had done in the past when copyright infringements were discovered.
"Had you followed the previous methods established in notification of a violation, we would have shut off the student and not allowed the problem to grow to the size and scope that it is today," Tompkins wrote Thursday in a letter to the RIAA's Sherman.
The RIAA said the massive nature of the alleged offenses required a strong response.
"This is not an instance of an individual student simply offering up some sound recordings on a Web site," said Matthew Oppenheim, senior vice president of business and legal affairs for the RIAA.
In the Michigan case, Oppenheim said, the student ran a network offering more than 650,000 music files for downloading, in addition to 1,866 songs from his own personal collection.
"It would be our hope that universities are aware of what is happening on their networks," he said. "The onus shouldn't rest on any given copyright holder to provide a warning to an individual when something of this size and scope is happening."
If you receive such a notice you could always switch isp's, it's also possbile to disconnect if people are tracking your connection, if you have a dialup it becomes very difficult to track you down. I personally live in Australia and am wondering if I am in much danger in general.
I guess it was inevitable that the RIAA/MPAA would want to stage a show trial to air their anger at p2p participants and it will be interesting to track the progress of this action. Clearly, they are going for maximum media attention by involving high profile universities ( even though as yet the schools themselves aren't cited) and by asking for such egregious fines. This tactic may serve to garner a lot of press coverage but I think it only serves to highlight the basic problem that they face- they only indicted four people. Out of millions. Can they really afford the time , money and possible public backlash that expanding this pogrom would entail?
It will be interesting to watch the number of downloads of Kazaa on sites like Download.com and see just how much of a deterrent this grandstanding will be.
Suing students...thats a really good idea, everyone knows how rich students are.
File sharing on uni network is only silly if youre at an american uni
The thing is these students werent careful enough, if you know your comp could be searched or whatever then you burn all your things and hide them somewhere, stop sharing files so the uni cant scan your shared folders etc etc
The RIAA dont scare me, its ok for them to rob people with pricing cds at extortinonate prices isnt it! Were all meant to be so happy at that They arent the police at the end of the day, ok so they can sue but i dont give a toss
Bootlegs have been around since before the internet, do they honestly think theyre going to stamp it out?
I believe in many respects they may actually be fueling p2p with all the media attention. Is it not a waste considering now that we have "gnut", "news groups", "bittorrent" and so on. My question is why so much attention on kazaa, I guess because its the largest. It seems kazaa is their greatest challenge considering how obscure it is. Is anyone out there seriously worried to the point that they do not share or have limited their p2p in any way (not including reg blocks)? Let us know so we can "dump" on you for bein' slippery.
I might also add this article if you haven't read it yet:
How to fail in e-business with a record effort
Thursday, October 10, 2002
It's easy to fail in e-business; what's hard is failing magnificently.
The Big Five music recording companies have been transcendent in this respect.
Their combined efforts have gone beyond killing their e-businesses and are close to destroying an entire industry.
The following are 10 rules of e-business failure, a list inspired by the recording industry's imaginative approach:
1. Refuse to change: Computers are just tools, and useful only in making your existing marketing model more efficient. Give word processors to your secretaries and install computerized stock-tracking systems so you can lay off staff. Declare the future to have arrived. Collect your performance bonus.
2. Ignore the Internet: If you can't imagine any way of making money on-line, then no one else can, either. Act surprised when the Internet starts to carry multimedia. Cry, "Who knew?" and insist the whole multimedia thing was invented only to ruin your business.
3. Be sanctimonious: Claim to be more concerned about the artists than about your profit. You are selfless; your only interest is paying the musicians, without whom you would be nothing. Pray that nobody remembers the countless rockers who signed away their souls on recording contracts and were dumped the moment their sales slipped.
4. Misunderstand your market: When you count the songs being swapped on peer-to-peer networks, do not notice that most are mouldy oldies. It's still theft, you argue, even if you stopped paying royalties for those songs in 1961. Blame piracy, not taste, for your inability to sell new songs that no radio station will play.
5. Lie: Go on Kazaa, count the MP3 versions of songs you produced, old and new, and multiply that number by the current retail price of a CD; howl that you are losing a fortune. Forget that a Buddy Holly album sold for $2.95 in 1958; you sell records for much more now, and that's the price you use when calculating your losses -- it's more impressive.
6. Kill it: Hollywood failed to make VCRs illegal, but you're going to succeed with peer-to-peer technology. Spend millions on lawyers to sue Napster and Scour into oblivion. Sure, paying lawyers has suddenly become more important than paying your artists, but so what? Hedge your bets by setting up your own Web site, offering songs that aren't selling well in stores. When your e-business proves to be less than a thundering success, blame it on the pirates -- meaning all your customers.
7. Pray it will all go away: Your noble efforts to shut down Napster and Scour will so terrify pirates that they will decamp immediately and other industries will lose all interest in P2P. Act as though U.S. court rulings in your favour apply to all other countries, regardless of their different legal principles. Do not make contingency plans.
8. Insult your market: After calling your customers "pirates," antagonize them further by threatening to release a flood of "empty" MP3 files to frustrate swapping. Do not understand the technical reasons why this won't work. Threaten to hack into the P2P networks like real criminals. Forget that some of these networks are based in foreign countries, which (for reasons you also cannot understand) do not subscribe to your system of justice. Then say you will launch denial-of-service attacks on pimply-faced file swappers, even if they live in those other countries.
9. Make government your accomplice: Demand exemptions from criminal prosecution by the U.S. government for your hacking and denial-of-service attacks. You're doing this for a Higher Cause, after all, which is paying royalties to your artists (remember them?). Drag Verizon Communications, an Internet provider, into court and demand it surrender the name of one of its subscribers allegedly sharing 600 music files, so your expensive lawyers can crush this kid's skull. Then get the Canadian government to impose a levy on all recordable media sold here, whether it's used for burning pirated music or archiving corporate data. Make mortal enemies of Apple and Sony because the levy adds something like 20 per cent to the retail price of their portable jukeboxes, pricing them out of the market. Collect more than $30-million without disbursing a single cent to your artists -- after all, you're Fighting the Good Fight, and you're going to have to tighten the artists' belts for them if you hope to win.
10. Go back to giving it away: Organize British record companies for a Digital Download Day. Charge £5 ($12.50) and claim it's "free." Reason that people would rather pay for music than get it for nothing on Morpheus. The "free" fee entitles people to listen to 500 streamed songs, to download 50 songs or to get five songs that can be burned on a CD. Ignore the math, which shows your £1 price for every burnable song is higher than the retail price per song on a British CD. Pretend you haven't noticed that your "day" is actually a week (Oct. 3 to 9), further proof that you can't count. Act surprised when your music servers can't handle the traffic and grind to a halt; blame the technology that put you on this terrible road in the first place. Angrily dismiss anyone who says that what you're doing is something you once told a judge is sheer piracy.
Got it?
Now get out there and fail. Oblivion awaits.
i we use a proxy then the riaa will be fooledQuote:
Originally posted by edgy2@5 April 2003 - 02:11
How 'protected' are we sharing our files with others on p2p?...see article on following website:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...04/MN122017.DTL
4 students sued over music trading software....
Quote:
Originally posted by zolaisugly@5 April 2003 - 01:14
well when they come they come it's your choice either share or not to share...as i live in uk i dont worry me about the riaa
im in england too, i heard about one guy who used to share thousands of files and got caught. then he got let-off and started again, so we dont have to worry too much
Mostly litigation is used against Kazaa's makers because unlike the Gnutella network, not enough is openly known about the network to hack it. This weakness of this is, like Napster, there is only 1 target corporation to be shut down to 'destroy' most/all of the network... that's what RIAA thinks anyway.Quote:
Originally posted by REALITY@14 April 2003 - 04:32
My question is why so much attention on kazaa, I guess because its the largest. It seems kazaa is their greatest challenge considering how obscure it is.
However, it has been pointed out that the fasttrack network CAN survive without a central supernode list server/s.
my ISP was mentioned in one of those articles... (not naming which)
..and I might be sharing files. I hope this isn't bad news :)
Would you be in more dangere if you live in the states or canada